=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1203/SPPSG-paper5
|storemode=property
|title=Social Practice Theory on Tour
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1203/SPPSG-paper5.pdf
|volume=Vol-1203
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/ict4s/LangendahlCP14
}}
==Social Practice Theory on Tour==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1203/SPPSG-paper5.pdf
Social Practice Theory on Tour:
Venturing beyond household aspects of smart grids
Per-Anders Langendahl, Matthew Cook, Stephen Potter
Department of Engineering and Innovation, Faculty of Mathematics, Computing and Technology,
The Open University,
Walton Hall, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK
Per-anders.langendahl@open.ac.uk
Abstract— Smart grids are promoted to resolve challenges of everyday life associated with electricity, water and mobility.
electricity production and consumption. Social studies of smart grids Seen this way, people’s attitudes, behaviour and choices do
have been undertaken that utilise practice theory to explore and gain not drive consumption [10]. Rather, people perform practices
insight on the development of smart grids with a particular focus on (e.g. cleaning, washing, eating, etc.) that require resources.
households. This perspective usefully describes practices in which
Household practices are neither static nor isolated; rather they
electricity is used in households. However, reducing smart grid
ecologies to everyday household practices may limit the potential of are dynamic and shaped by relations and inter-dependencies
practice theory to understand development of smart grids. Thus in that lie beyond households. For example, the use of air-
this paper we explored the potential of practice theory to account for conditioning in households is not a simple matter of turning
practices performed by actors associated with smart grids beyond air-conditioning units on or off. Rather, notions of wellbeing
households. and convenience (perhaps even luxury) as well as the building
itself and the air-conditioning unit are implicated in how
Key words— Smart grids, practice theory, beyond households. practices are performed. In this way, practices in households
that require electricity are shaped by multiple relations
I. INTRODUCTION including human and non-human actors. Thus, a practice
Smart grids are promoted in many national policies to theory perspective can usefully reveal relations and inter-
accelerate transition to a low carbon, secure and affordable dependencies that reinforce notions of ‘that is the way we do
electricity supply [1, 2, and 3]. Techno-centric notions of things around here’. However, framing practices around
smart grids are often described in terms of positive effects. households may limit the potential of this perspective to
Framed this way: smart grids tend to involve: account for smart grid developments.
A practice perspective framed around households does not
• integrating Information and Communication account for practices developing among electricity supply side
Technologies (ICT) with existing infrastructure actors (e.g. utility firms) and regulators. By excluding
enabling two-way flows of information of electricity practices beyond households, analysts may miss out other
relations and interdependencies that matter in the development
consumption between utilities and demand side actors
of smart grids. For example, development of smart grid
(e.g. smart meters in households); and
infrastructure undertaken by electricity network operators may
• enabling a two-way flow of electricity between
facilitate and constrain other aspects of smart grids: it frames
utilities and demand side actors to accommodate
subsequent activities, including practices associated with
distributed generation (e.g. local renewable energy)
electricity production and demand. Thus, how smart grids are
and low carbon practices and technologies (e.g.
socially constructed beyond households is the question we
electric vehicles).
begin to address in this paper. We do so by drawing on
practice theory and explore the potential of this perspective to
Smart grids are envisaged to increase energy efficiency, shift
account for practices across the smart grid by taking a tour
energy demand and increase integration of renewable
beyond the household.
generation into the grid [4, 5]. However, such techno-centric
framings of smart grids say little about changes in behaviour II. EXPLORING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PRACTICE THEORY
of various social actors. Increasingly, social studies of smart APPROACH BEYOND HOUSEHOLDS
grids have been undertaken using practice theory to explore
Drawing on a practice perspective, we can think of smart grids
development of smart grids and household behaviour [6, 7,
as an ecology of human (e.g. people) and non-human actors
and 8].
(e.g. technologies, artefacts and infrastructures). Practices of
Following Giddens [9], practice theory provides an
smart grids are not only developing in households, but also
interesting way to understand social aspects of smart grid
among supply side actors, regulators and various
developments. Practice theory centres on activities of
intermediaries situated between supply and demand.
Actors on the supply side in a conventional electricity or supported by the existing regulatory frameworks. Regulators
system framework include various utility firms involved with may need to develop practices which enable them to further
power generation, transmission and distribution. These are respond to and lead these new developments.
often seen as technical actors with engineering skills who
perform practices of developing and maintaining technical III. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
infrastructures. Technologies (e.g. power plants, cabling and Social studies of smart grids have been undertaken that
substations) are important elements of supply side practices, utilise practice theory to explore and gain insight on the
but choices made by supply side actors in developing aspects development of smart grids with a particular focus on
of smart grids are fundamentally a social process. households. This perspective usefully describes practices in
Examples of supply side social processes associated with which electricity is used in households. However, reducing
smart grid developments can be seen in various pilot and smart grid ecologies to everyday household practices may
demonstration projects. In the UK, the Low Carbon Network limit the potential of practice theory to understand
Fund (LCNF) provides financial support to Distribution development of smart grids. Thus in this paper we explored
Network Operators (DNOs) to develop smart grid measures. the potential of practice theory to account for practices
These measures involve developing new practices for regional performed by actors associated with smart grids beyond
and local network infrastructure. Traditional measures involve households. We grouped these actors into supply side actors
practices of strengthening network infrastructure to meet (e.g. utility firms); intermediary actors (e.g. aggregators);
increases in demand. A key part of smart grids is that they demand side firms; and regulators.
enable the use of demand response arrangements to manage Drawing on practice theory to explore and gain insights
load on a network. across smart grid developments (beyond households) may be
Demand response involves measures deployed by a network useful for two reasons. Firstly, it provides analytical
operator (e.g. National Grid or a DNO) to engage firms with consistency to account for smart grid developments including
significant energy consumption to reduce electricity or households, supply side actors, regulators and various
generate their own electricity when requested. This aspect of intermediaries. Seen this way, practices can usefully be
smart grids is being developed to address short term viewed as micro-level activities that are constituted by an
disruptions on the grid and to reduce peak electricity demand. ecology of which they form part; and this ecology is
While demand response actions may benefit supply side constituted and sustained by practices which comprise them.
actors, it may also require them to change the way they Secondly, aspects of smart grids are shaped by practices and is
operate. Similar to households, firms perform practices that practice shaping: smart grid interventions are an outcome of
require electricity, such as manufacturing, running IT systems various inter-related practices. Seen this way, aspects of smart
etc. Many firms also perform practices of managing their grids such as demand response are not developed by one
electricity consumption to control costs and may seek to avoid central actor. Rather, demand response is shaped by multiple
peak electricity prices, engage in demand response actors and associated practices. Thus, practice theory may
programmes. For example, demand response programmes usefully reveal roles of various actors, including relations and
provide firms with an opportunity to reduce load or shift to inter-dependencies between actors (e.g. utility firms, firms,
their own stand-by generators when requested. While this may regulators, technology and service providers and other
involve a low carbon option for firms, it may also hamper a intermediaries); and explore resistance and change across
focus on reducing electricity consumed in the first place. A smart grid developments.
practice perspective may usefully reveal how firm practices We conclude that a practice perspective can reveal relations
associated with electricity are developing in relation to utility and interdependencies, not only in households, but also how
firms. practices are developing among supply side actors, regulators
There are also intermediary actors involved in demand and intermediaries. However, while frames are important,
response initiatives. A key group, known as aggregators, act boundaries are set by researchers. Seen this way, practice
as an agent for firms who can reduce electricity consumption theory is performtive: how boundaries are drawn matters. For
or generate their own electricity when requested. The example, a focus on household practices does not only reveal
aggregator can coordinate capacity from several firms and link important and potentially useful insights for developing smart
this to transmission or distribution networks. To some extent grids, it also creates a frame for action. Indeed, practices in
the aggregator mediates changes in practices and permits households matters in smart grid developments. However, a
shared learning to take place. practice perspective has potential to reveal practices across
A final destination on our tour of smart grid ecology smart grid developments and create frame for action beyond
involves the industry regulators. Regulation is not developed in households. In conclusion, practice theory can make important
a political vacuum disconnected from the sector it regulates (cf. contribution to understand how practices persist, routed in
Moran [11]). For example, the way electricity sectors in the being, as enduring entities that are reproduced through
UK are regulated is built around a centralised model of recurrent performances. However, this practice perspective is
electricity provision, supply and demand. Aspects of smart not without limitation [12]. This perspective may reinforce the
grids involving partial decentralisation of electricity supply and view that practices are locked in patterns of performances
demand, such as distributed generation, may not be recognised ingrained in the doings at the level of micro-activities, which
may not lend itself to understand innovation and change. [5] Blumsack, S, and Fernandez, A., 2012. Ready or not, here
Further research undertaken from a practice perspective may comes the smart grid! Energy, 37, 61-68
explore and describe what smart grids might become. [6] Strengers, Y. 2013. Smart Energy Technologies In Everyday
Life: Smart Utopia? Palgrave Macmillian, UK
[7] Hargreaves, T., Nye, M. and Burgess, J., 2013. Keeping energy
REFERENCES visible? Exploring how householders interact with feedback
from smart energy monitors in the longer term. Energy Policy,
[1] DECC (Department of Energy and Climate Change), 2011.
52, 126-134
Planning our electric future: a White Paper for secure,
[8] Shove, E., 2012. Energy Transition in Practice: The Case of
affordable and low carbon electricity. Department of Energy
Global Indoor Climate Change. In, Verbong, G. and Loorbach,
and Climate Change, London
D. (eds.) 2012, Governing the Energy Transition. Routledge
[2] European Commission. 2011. Smart Grids: from innovation to
[9] Giddens, A.,1984. The constitution of society. Cambridge:
deployment, European Commission Directorate-General for
Policy Press, UK.
Energy, Brussels.
[10] Shove, E. 2010. Beyond the ABC: Climate change policy and
[3] Hammond, G. P. and Pearson, P. J. G., 2013. Editorial:
theories of social change. Environment and Planning A, vol. 42:
Challenges of the transition to a low carbon, more electric
1273-85
future: From here to 2050. Energy Policy, 52, 1-9
[11] Moran, M. 2003. The British Regulatory State: High Modernism
[4] Ngar-yin Mah, D., vad der Vleuten, J. M., Hills, P. and Tao, J.
and Hyper-Innovation. Oxford University Press, UK.
2012. Consumer Perceptions of smart grid development: Results
[12] Geels, F. W., 2010. Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to
of a Hong Kong survey and policy implications. Energy Policy,
sustainability), and the multi-level perspective. Research Policy,
vol. 49, 204-16
39:4, 445-476